New Delhi: A 2-judge Bench of the Supreme Court has frowned upon the registry’s refusal to list the cases on procedural lapses.
A bench, headed by Justice Abhay S. Oka, said that when there is a judicial order directing the listing of the cases specifically assigned to a particular Bench, the registry “cannot defy the order and refuse to list the cases on the ground that there was non-compliance with procedural aspects”.
In the instant case, six petitions were not listed despite the apex court’s directions to list them on the ground that the advocate representing the petitioner had not produced on record the proof of service of copies of the pleas on caveators.
The apex court registry relied upon Rule 2 of Order XV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 which enjoins the petitioner to serve notice of the caveat along with a copy of the petition to the caveator.
Taking a stern view, the Bench, also comprising Justice A.G. Masih, opined that no rule in the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 provides that on the ground of the failure to comply with requirements of Rule 2 of Order XV, a case cannot be listed before the court even if there is a direction of the court to list it.
“There may be cases of extreme urgency. In such cases, the registry cannot rely upon Rule 2 of Order XV and refuse to list the case. (T)herefore, when there is a direction of the Court to list SLPs/appeals notwithstanding non-compliance with Rule 2 of Chapter XV of the Rules, the Registry can always list the case before the Court with an office report highlighting the failure of the petitioner/appellant to comply with requirements of Rule 2 of Order XV of the Rules,” it added.
Asking the Registrar (Judicial) to take note of its order, the Justice Oka-led Bench said the incident of defiance of judicial order should not be repeated.
It said that in an appeal or a Special Leave Petition, a caveator does not have the right to be heard on the issue of grant of leave or admission of the appeal but has a right of hearing on the prayer for interim relief.
A caveat serves as a notice submitted to an appellate court by a litigant who wishes to be heard in case any orders are issued regarding an opponent’s appeal that challenges the decision made by the lower judicial or quasi-judicial body.
(IANS)
